[Tagging] Sidewalks and cycleways as tags vs as extra lines

["Christian Müller"]

> Gesendet: Dienstag, 16. Januar 2018 um 14:50 Uhr
> Von: "Mateusz Konieczny" <matkoniecz at gmail.com>
> An: "Christian Müller" <cmue81 at gmx.de>
> Cc: tagging at openstreetmap.org
> Betreff: Re: [Tagging] Sidewalks and cycleways as tags vs as extra lines
>
> On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 14:32:27 +0100
> "Christian Müller" <cmue81 at gmx.de> wrote:
> 
> > No, cycleway=opposite is actually harder to use.  Without the wiki
> > documentation noone knows what this actually means, it is not self-
> > explanatory.
> 
> And cycleway:left=opposite is?

Only if considering it as a continuation of values in current use,
otherwise not so, no.  Because the problem I was referring to remains,
the tag value actually refers to a different tag key:  It is not the
cycleway on the left that is "opposite" but the direction of traffic
on it, and to represent this, osm chose "oneway" tag since long.

> Also, I am curious whatever you think that it is self-explanatory and
> easier to understand than cycleway=opposite.

Ok, consider sidewalk, the value set is well defined and only encodes
a relative location (nothing else):  left, right, both, none.

Transport this to the cycleway tag and limit its value set to the same
values, then you're left to encode information on direction of traffic
with a separate tag (or instead, leave this information to the parallel
way running along).

I.e., if a separate (cycle)way does not exist,
then on the motorized way the tagging may be

cycleway=left
cycleway:left:oneway=-1
cycleway:left:location=track|lane
OR
cycleway:left=track|lane
cycleway:left:oneway=-1

I.e., if a parallel (cycle)way does exist,
then the motorized way could, just as for
the sidewalk case only inform about its
presence, instead of repeating tags in
a manner free to ambiguity.

cycleway:left=separate


Greetings
cm